Replies to post #65037 on Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[McMagyar]

the PK data released after PART A was after 24 DAYS of dosing from(with off period of 12 between). Any seriously positive PK Data shown for PART A would have been expected due to computer modeling, but NOT EXPECTED DUE to 99% FAILURE RATE of Alzheimer Drugs. SO..when PART A Data showed such striking linkage to Dose Response in such a SHORT time frame, the REAL PK became PART B 12 WEEKS..It would have been nice to see Ananvex include 12 Weeks in the title..but Anavex is fighting a WAR ..and right now, shareholders are the front line soldiers..WHY WOULD Anavex RE-HASH OLD PK DATA at AAIC? This would be terrible management, and the ONE THING WE KNOW..IS..we have GRRRREAT Management..SO Ipso Facto, Quasium ad Nauseum,Blinko Gingkorum,..PK 12 Week is AWESOME..

[circa1762]

That's easy to explain since Part B does in fact have dose variation, 30mg and 50mg in Part B, as one can see in the "Arms" section of the 2a trial on clinicaltrials.gov. Also, we do know AAIC's definition of substantially new, because they lay it out very clearly on the AAIC policies page -- data cannot have been released in any form prior to conference. That excludes the 5-wk dose-response data PR'd in January and means this must be the 12-wk dose-response data, submitted by the May 2nd late-breaking deadline.